WASHINGTON -- Gary Bauer, former Republican presidential candidate and Campaign for Working Families founder, today issued the following statement on the case currently before the U.S. Supreme Court regarding the Boy Scouts' ban on homosexual counselors:
"If the United States Supreme Court were to rule in Boy Scouts of America v. Dale that the scouts are a public accommodation, then the Constitution's guarantee of freedom of association and the free exercise of religion will have been dealt a fatal blow."
"The Boy Scouts of America indisputably is a private, voluntary organization, not a 'public accommodation' as the homosexual activists allege. The scouts take no government money, are composed almost entirely of volunteers and the vast majority of troops have non-governmental sponsors. Nearly 65 percent of scout troops, in fact, are sponsored by churches.
"The lawsuit not only alleges that the scouts comprise a public accommodation like restaurants or hotels, and therefore cannot discriminate against homosexuals under the 1964 Civil Rights Act; it also claims the government has the right to reinterpret the organization's core beliefs by forcing scouts to accept homosexual counselors. Since when does the government have the power to dictate the mission or message of a private organization?
"The Boy Scouts long have stood for traditional family values. The Scouting Code is rooted in historic Judeo-Christian moral standards. Belief in God is the core value in scouting. Scouting does not admit atheists who refuse to take the Scout Oath which begins, "On my honor, I will do my best to do my duty to God . . ." That scouting is an exercise of religion appears obvious.
"Moreover, scouting exists to shepherd boys into manhood by means of adults befriending and mentoring them. The scouts believe that allowing homosexuals to participate as counselors is antithetical to this mission and the inculcation of traditional moral values. The government has no constitutional authority to dictate otherwise.
"If the court were to rule against the scouts in favor of the plaintiff, then freedom of association and religion would simply cease to exist. Next the government would be free to dictate to churches what practices were permissible and orthodox in the name of a nebulous 'compelling state interest' in stopping discrimination. Such a ruling would destroy the very touchstone of our liberty -- freedom of conscience." |
